cosmos

Why should he sell it? Porsche is fixing the car (Warrenty like they should, but if it’s bad gas was that their fault)? And cash, and a watch and other things. No need to want a new car. I understand the experience sours things, but that’s life and I know it sucks, he just wants his car. But he’s not being left out to dry.

soulsea

You and your opinion are just one data point. You can keep repeating yourself all you want but the overall market doesn't care.

Buyers care about many things when deciding to purchase a used vehicle. Does it have buckets, is it a manual, has it been tracked, has it had major mechanical issues. Your take is like saying the car has been an accident but the dealer fixed it as good as new, value is the same, so what's the problem? Diminished value is a real thing, insurance companies account for it. It may not matter to you, but the overall market discounts a car with a replacement engine over an issue free one, never mind if the car is as good as new after the fix ... that's why buyers track service records through carfax, and that's why there's well known distinction off marketing a vehicle as a 'no story' car. This car is now a 'story' car that the OP will have to explain whenever he goes to sell it, and most people will care an d leverage that info for a discount. Why lemon law it? Because after he's made whole he can replace it with a no story car and have back end protection when he goes to sell that one, which is the least he deserves as none of this is his fault.

The reason lemon laws exist isn't only to make sure that consumers don't get crappy vehicles, but to ensure they are made financially whole ... if the cars were worth as much after major mechanical failures there would be no need for such protections.

You are extrapolating your own opinion and giving terrible advice that would cost someone actual money should they decide to follow it. Can't believe any of this even needs explaining ... just stop.

Diablo Dude

Well said.
Agreed 100%

cosmos

Not true, it wasn’t in any accident, it has a mechanical issue. Your logic is flawed because you want to justify your position, which is wrong. This is the same as any other Warrenty work carried out. The car does not have diminished value because it’s not being repaired in a way to reflect a lesser than new. Paint, sure I get it, all shops are different never know what’s lurking underneath. An engine out replacement of a another factory engine, is fine. Just because it feels icky, doesn’t make it so.

Tell me what Warrenty work is okay and what Warrenty work is not, where is the line drawn?

soulsea

There are obvious differences to everyone but you between a door actuator failing, engine replacement, and everything in between. There is a hypothetical diagram in the ethers that will show the reduction in demand and resulting reduction in value the more acute the mechanical issue that has afflicted any vehicle. You can be assured that replacement engine, still don't know what the issue is months in, start taking other systems apart to throw darts at it until we figure it out and then replace whatever system is actually at fault, are high up on the hierarchy of how far above their line most people will consider this story to be. Many will not even consider a car with such history, and those who will will only do so at a discount. Hell, you might be the one person in the world willing to pay full market value for it after all is said and done ... although I suspect your conviction will not be as strong come check writing time as it is just typing nonsense out in this thread.

Again I will ask you to stop, but again I suspect that you won't. I however am done with this interaction. I don't care what you believe as I'm sure you don't care what I believe, the only reason for my interaction was not to engage with you but merely to make sure the OP did not put any merit to your catastrophic take on his situation. That accomplished, he can make his own decisions accordingly.

Randy M

I had a '16 GT350 where the engine failed at 3K miles. Ford initially offered to replace the engine. I did not want the car with a replaced engine, I wanted a new car. It took some arm twisting, a letter to Ford from both me and the owner of the dealership to get a new one. I waited six months and one model year but I finally got it.

I've also had two '70 Boss 302's. One had the original engine w/ the last half of the VIN stamped in the back of the block. The other one had a service block as many of the Boss 302 engines would develop cracks in the piston skirts and often Ford would just replace the engine. Even though collectors and old muscle car enthusiasts know the story, they still want to see the original block in a car.

OP, advocate for yourself if you want something different than what they offer you.

4carl

Did anybody look at the clutch in the picture of the dissembled engine
.I have a question does it look like the clutch is a twin disk?
It looks like it could be a twin disk which is interesting as the 992s had a twin disk but the parts diagram for the GT3 shows what looks like a single disk.
It would be better it actually was a twin disk.
If done right a twin disk can take more torque .
.The down side is they can also be hard/grabby to use.
The clutch in the 992S i had was great as is the one in the GT3.

ipse dixit

Might be because it’s a 6 (and not a 7) MT.

Also weight comes into play I’d imagine.

4carl

In addition the turbo has much more torque than the GT3 .
So theoretically a twin disk for the 992s and a single for the GT3?
If you look at the picture of the disk and pressure plate it looks like the pressure plate has a floating intermediate plate for a twin disk set up..